|
Post by turkeykiller on Jan 12, 2019 10:49:49 GMT -5
Sittin here Sat. mornin waitin for the "big" snow storm, I thought about expressin my opinions.
Archery-- to me, that implies a shaft (arrow or bolt), propelled by a string. Rifle-- a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge.
When rifle deer season was established years ago, the rifle was generally an open sighted, low velocity weapon. Over the years, innovation has changed the rifle to a high powered, special caliber, computer designed bullet, with $1000 dollar range adjustin scope, capable of shootin deer from one mountain to another. With all these new developments, it is still a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge.
When archery season was established, the weapon was a longbow or recurve. Over the years, innovation has developed new ways to propel the shaft, but it still falls under the definition of a shaft propelled by a string.
The technology that advanced the capabilities of the rifle were widely accepted, but not so much with archery equipment.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Jan 12, 2019 11:52:46 GMT -5
I would add that the arrow shaft should be propelled by a string from energy stored in drawn limbs. If the arrows is propelled by a string from energy stored in springs, pistons, or compressed gas, the device should no longer meet the definition of a bow.
|
|
|
Post by cspot on Jan 12, 2019 12:19:51 GMT -5
Sittin here Sat. mornin waitin for the "big" snow storm, I thought about expressin my opinions. Archery-- to me, that implies a shaft (arrow or bolt), propelled by a string. Rifle-- a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge. When rifle deer season was established years ago, the rifle was generally an open sighted, low velocity weapon. Over the years, innovation has changed the rifle to a high powered, special caliber, computer designed bullet, with $1000 dollar range adjustin scope, capable of shootin deer from one mountain to another. With all these new developments, it is still a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge. When archery season was established, the weapon was a longbow or recurve. Over the years, innovation has developed new ways to propel the shaft, but it still falls under the definition of a shaft propelled by a string. The technology that advanced the capabilities of the rifle were widely accepted, but not so much with archery equipment. I agree that both rifles and archery equipment has had alot of advances. To further add so has alot of other equipment. Rangefinders, handwarmers, better clothing and boots, and a whole host of other things has advanced right along too. The availability of information about how to hunt has really expanded too. What would take a hunter many years to learn can now be found right at your fingertips.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 12:31:56 GMT -5
Sittin here Sat. mornin waitin for the "big" snow storm, I thought about expressin my opinions. Archery-- to me, that implies a shaft (arrow or bolt), propelled by a string. Rifle-- a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge. When rifle deer season was established years ago, the rifle was generally an open sighted, low velocity weapon. Over the years, innovation has changed the rifle to a high powered, special caliber, computer designed bullet, with $1000 dollar range adjustin scope, capable of shootin deer from one mountain to another. With all these new developments, it is still a bullet propelled from a barrel with an explosive charge. When archery season was established, the weapon was a longbow or recurve. Over the years, innovation has developed new ways to propel the shaft, but it still falls under the definition of a shaft propelled by a string. The technology that advanced the capabilities of the rifle were widely accepted, but not so much with archery equipment. I agree that both rifles and archery equipment has had alot of advances. To further add so has alot of other equipment. Rangefinders, handwarmers, better clothing and boots, and a whole host of other things has advanced right along too. The availability of information about how to hunt has really expanded too. What would take a hunter many years to learn can now be found right at your fingertips.
"to learn can now be found right at your fingertips"
To a certain extent, yes. But being mentored by a "good hunter & woodsman" weighs far more heavily in my book. And I'm sure everyone would agree!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 12:48:03 GMT -5
...And learning from one's own mistakes. Guess I've learned a ton! 😊
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Jan 12, 2019 21:12:09 GMT -5
Not me. I've never taken one false step yet. Okay, maybe a coupla thousand, but not just one. Still kicking myself for failing to drop a deer this season with one shot, like I had done over a dozen times before with that rifle. Same creek bottom to hillside distances, my mistake. Apparently the 18 year layoff was more of an issue than I had thought? Won't happen again. Not much ultra modern tech involved, as my range finder is almost 20 years old. There are far better ones available today. Basic 6x24x44 scope and standard cartridge. Been over 36 years since the first time I killed a deer with that rifle, in excess of 300 yards. Always had a solid rest, this time I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by turkeykiller on Jan 13, 2019 5:10:39 GMT -5
A 20 year old range finder is better than no range finder, and a 6x24 scope is is more high tech than open sights.
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Jan 13, 2019 6:45:43 GMT -5
Nah.. learning from your fingertips makes me think about what is wrong with our country. We have become a Cliff’s Notes society. People become self annointed experts without any practical experience, or reading anything beyond the headline.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 13, 2019 9:55:04 GMT -5
When my grandfather and his brothers started hunting deer, they used the shotguns they used for small game. Things progressed from there.
|
|
|
Post by cspot on Jan 13, 2019 10:02:32 GMT -5
When my grandfather and his brothers started hunting deer, they used the shotguns they used for small game. Things progressed from there. That is kinda my point and what I am thinking about. I will use myself for an example. My Dad grew up small game hunting and only started deer hunting once deer became somewhat plentiful in SWPA. The population was low when he started. Rifle hunting was the norm and basically he and others small game hunted for deer. By that I mean that they hunted them like you do rabbits. Working as a group doing drives, following tracks etc. There was very little sit and wait. There methods were extremely effective with a rifle. I started hunting a little after compounds started. My brother and I started hunting with them before my Dad. We didn't know crap about tuning bows, wind directions, thermals, etc. My Dad started with a bow several years after we did. It was a learning process for all of us to figure it out. The internet wasn't around then. Fast forward to today. Even if one doesn't have a mentor that archery hunts, you can read alot of information about setup, wind direction, thermals, etc to give you a big start over say where we were when we started archery hunting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2019 17:54:46 GMT -5
Nah.. learning from your fingertips makes me think about what is wrong with our country. We have become a Cliff’s Notes society. People become self annointed experts without any practical experience, or reading anything beyond the headline. In algebra: X is any unknown quantity. In plumbing: A spurt is a drip under pressure. X spurt: Any unknown drip under pressure.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 14, 2019 9:10:33 GMT -5
There haven't been any significant technological advances with rifles over the past 50 years that have amounted to a hill of beans as far as increasing the harvest.A pre 64win model 70 is still the same deer killing sob that it was in the 60's.Even a 94 win in 30/30 will suit most hunters in 90% of the situations they encounter.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 14, 2019 9:11:29 GMT -5
When my grandfather and his brothers started hunting deer, they used the shotguns they used for small game. Things progressed from there. That is kinda my point and what I am thinking about. I will use myself for an example. My Dad grew up small game hunting and only started deer hunting once deer became somewhat plentiful in SWPA. The population was low when he started. Rifle hunting was the norm and basically he and others small game hunted for deer. By that I mean that they hunted them like you do rabbits. Working as a group doing drives, following tracks etc. There was very little sit and wait. There methods were extremely effective with a rifle. I started hunting a little after compounds started. My brother and I started hunting with them before my Dad. We didn't know crap about tuning bows, wind directions, thermals, etc. My Dad started with a bow several years after we did. It was a learning process for all of us to figure it out. The internet wasn't around then. Fast forward to today. Even if one doesn't have a mentor that archery hunts, you can read alot of information about setup, wind direction, thermals, etc to give you a big start over say where we were when we started archery hunting. One can easily become an internet expert today or a wannabe professional hunter but that doesn't make it so.
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Jan 14, 2019 9:38:53 GMT -5
I thought I was wrong once, but then I found truth on the internet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 12:46:18 GMT -5
I found truth, justice, and the American way when I read Superman comics.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 14, 2019 13:03:24 GMT -5
There haven't been any significant technological advances with rifles over the past 50 years that have amounted to a hill of beans as far as increasing the harvest.A pre 64win model 70 is still the same deer killing sob that it was in the 60's.Even a 94 win in 30/30 will suit most hunters in 90% of the situations they encounter. I agree, but when gun season went from using shotguns to scoped rifles, in 20 to 30 years, that was a giant leap.
|
|
|
Post by turkeykiller on Jan 14, 2019 13:46:31 GMT -5
There haven't been any significant technological advances with rifles over the past 50 years that have amounted to a hill of beans as far as increasing the harvest.A pre 64win model 70 is still the same deer killing sob that it was in the 60's.Even a 94 win in 30/30 will suit most hunters in 90% of the situations they encounter. I agree a 30-30 would suit in 90% of situations, but most hunters aint buyin that. Purchases of new caliber rifles has far out weighed the sales of new 30-30's. The basic function of a model 70 has not changed, but the advancement in bullet construction and new powders has greatly increased and improved the effectiveness of the rifle. Also the advancements in scopes and what they can do has helped increase the harvest. You claim the advancements havent increased the harvest over the last 50 yrs. I dont think hunters were killin deer at ranges they are now on powerlines, gaslines, and large fields that they were 50 yrs ago.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 14, 2019 14:13:14 GMT -5
I've lost track of how many deer I've killed and I've never killed one past about 225 yards and that was only a couple of times.The truth is,the vast majority of hunters aren't capable of killing deer further than that on a consistent basis.Most rifles were always far more effective than most shooters.Good bullets and good rifles have been widely available for the past 50+ years.I can't honestly think of one time that having a more powerful or more accurate rifle would have made the difference between a deer dying and living for me.Even with compounds,the differences haven't made much difference to me.Sure,bows are faster and more quiet but the mechanics of the shot have stayed the same.I was just as effective shooting fingers thirty years ago because I generally only shoot under 35 yards.I'd still shoot fingers today if I could find a suitable finger bow that I liked.The biggest advancemnt with rifles is weight and that doesn't make a hunter more effective.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 14, 2019 14:15:35 GMT -5
There haven't been any significant technological advances with rifles over the past 50 years that have amounted to a hill of beans as far as increasing the harvest.A pre 64win model 70 is still the same deer killing sob that it was in the 60's.Even a 94 win in 30/30 will suit most hunters in 90% of the situations they encounter. I agree, but when gun season went from using shotguns to scoped rifles, in 20 to 30 years, that was a giant leap. There's a big difference between between using pumpkin balls out of a smoothbore shotgun than a rifle but it's been way over 50 years since that was the norm.The truth is.my Kimber Montana in .308 is no more effective than a guy with a pre 64 30-06.
|
|
|
Post by turkeykiller on Jan 14, 2019 14:30:18 GMT -5
I've lost track of how many deer I've killed and I've never killed one past about 225 yards and that was only a couple of times.The truth is,the vast majority of hunters aren't capable of killing deer further than that on a consistent basis.Most rifles were always far more effective than most shooters.Good bullets and good rifles have been widely available for the past 50+ years.I can't honestly think of one time that having a more powerful or more accurate rifle would have made the difference between a deer dying and living for me.Even with compounds,the differences haven't made much difference to me.Sure,bows are faster and more quiet but the mechanics of the shot have stayed the same.I was just as effective shooting fingers thirty years ago because I generally only shoot under 35 yards.I'd still shoot fingers today if I could find a suitable finger bow that I liked.The biggest advancemnt with rifles is weight and that doesn't make a hunter more effective. I agree most rifles are more effective than the person usin them. However, there are hunters takin shots today that they never would have attempted even 20 yrs ago. I also agree good bullets and rifles have been around 50 yrs, but the advances in technology today has improved them greatly.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Jan 14, 2019 14:43:41 GMT -5
Laser rangefinders. Prior to them, long range rifle hunting was a guessing game.
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Jan 14, 2019 15:13:02 GMT -5
Lots of stuff has changed. I think most of us have bought more and more guns over the years not because we wanted a 1000 yard rifle, but because the wife bought a new pair of shoes so what's fair is fair. The one thing that I think has had more of an impact on deer hunting that any piece of equipment, or AR/HR/QDMA plan, is hunting tactics. Most people these days hunt from a tree. They don't move. Mostly because their access to land has shrunken. And everybody else is in a tree and they get really annoyed if they see you walking around. When most deer hunting was walking around and leaning against the occasional tree or sitting on a stump, shots at deer were relatively close. The old ever action Winchester, Savage, or Marlin was the go to gun. Open sights and Meat (Peep) sights were the norm. Times have changed. My old Winchester and Marlin lever guns have not been hunted with for probably 25 years. I need to fix that next season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 15:14:57 GMT -5
My first range finder was not a laser model. It was optical. It worked by dialing it to make an image come into focus. I think such rangefinders were also called "coincidence rangefinders." Do any of you remember such? I have no idea where it got to.
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Jan 14, 2019 15:20:35 GMT -5
My first range finder was not a laser model. It was optical. It worked by dialing it to make an image come into focus. I think such rangefinders were also called "coincidence rangefinders." Do any of you remember such? I have no idea where it got to. Yep. I have one of those around here somewhere. Used it for archery.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 14, 2019 15:21:55 GMT -5
Lots of stuff has changed. I think most of us have bought more and more guns over the years not because we wanted a 1000 yard rifle, but because the wife bought a new pair of shoes so what's fair is fair. The one thing that I think has had more of an impact on deer hunting that any piece of equipment, or AR/HR/QDMA plan, is hunting tactics. Most people these days hunt from a tree. They don't move. Mostly because their access to land has shrunken. And everybody else is in a tree and they get really annoyed if they see you walking around. When most deer hunting was walking around and leaning against the occasional tree or sitting on a stump, shots at deer were relatively close. The old ever action Winchester, Savage, or Marlin was the go to gun. Open sights and Meat (Peep) sights were the norm. Times have changed. My old Winchester and Marlin lever guns have not been hunted with for probably 25 years. I need to fix that next season. Time has stood still here Glen.I hunt the same way today as I did as a youngster and that's how I've taught my son how to hunt.There's not all that many people into long range hunting in Pa and not that many are capable.I'm not into lever guns.I like a nice,light bolt action in a short action caliber.It's very rare for me to shoot past 100 yards.
|
|